Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1887-11-22
COURT OF APPEALS.
Synopsss Of Decisions Rendered at the
Present Tyler Sitting.
Corrasnondence of the Gazette

Synopsss Of Decisions Rendered at III.
Present Tyler Sitting.
Correspondence of the Gazette.
TYLER, TEX, Nov. 19 j. A. Nelson e
al VS.. g. W. Morris; appeal from Rock
wall. This was suit on promissory
note for the sum OF 1925, on which there
was endorsed credit of $500. This sui
was instituted to recover the unpaid
value together with interest. Verdict
Of plaintiff for $61.12. Defendants appeal
Held: This court cannot entertain juris-
diction Of this case, because both the
sum sued for and the amount for which
| Judgment was recovered is under 500
Dismissed. Wilson, J.
B. Rose vs.. Frees & Son; error from
| VanZandt. This is a trial of the
right OF property Where the
evidence is conflicting and 8
! jury, who are the exclusive judges OF the
weight of the testimony and of the
credibillt7 of the witnesses, have passed
| upon the same, and there is ample proof
to sustain the verdict and Judgment,
this court will not disturb the judgment
of the court below. No material error.
Affirmed. Wilson, J.
Harry Flagg VS.. the State; appeal from
VanZan 1t; conviction for carrying g pis-
tol. The Information charged the de-
PENDANT with carrying pistol on or about
his person. The evidence showed thet
appellant had the pistol on buggy seat,
by his side. 1t is urgently insisted by
counsel for appellant that these facts
do not sustain the allegation that
the pistol was carried on or about his
person. Held: The proof sust6ins the
allegation and conviction, and there was
no error in the court below. Affirmed.
Wilson, j.
W. A Buchanan vs.. A M. Bsne; appeal
from Rusk. Ia 1884 James a. Bane, hus-
band Of appellee, departed this life, Ieav-
ing will. Oie clause of said will read
as follows: "My wife, A. M. Baue, shall
have reasonable support as long as she
may live, provided, however, we do not
separate; in that event she shall hsve
nothing save and except her community
interest in my estate since the
date OF our marriage" W. A.
Buchanan, appellant, was appointed
executor by the will. All the property,
resi- and personal, belonging to deceased
was decided to his children. Appellee
brought this suit to compel the executor
to psy her $3.50 annually as a reasonable
support. TIE court below gave judg-
ment for $3.50 annual support. Appellant
claims that the court below erred in its
finding because the same was not proper
construction Of the will, because the APP
pellee might eventually consume the en-
tire estate, when the property real and
personal was absolutely vested in the
children by the first clause of the will. |
Held: The trial judge gave a proper
to the will. None of the |
of error are we'll tsken. At
frmed. White, P J.
Missouri Pacific Railway Company vs.. |
Walter Bell; appeal from Hunt. On a
former day OF the term this court sus-
tanned q motion to strike out the tran
script because the same was defective.
The appellee has filed proper certificate
and asks for an affigmance OF the case.
Held: The motion will be sustained and
the judgment affirmed. Affirmed on GER
tifcste. Willson,J.
Jasper Gay vs.. the State; appeal from
Rusk. Where witness YVES subpeaeed
In March and the trial was. had in June,
and a continuance is sought on
the ground of the absence Of
the witness so summoned, it not |
being shown that witness was present |
during the Intervening terms between |
said summons and triaI. Held: There |
was no error in overruling the motion to !
continue. It is not necessary to charge |
in the information the words aggravated !
assault" to make iT valid. The assault |
becomes aggravated by reason of the
facts connected with it. No error and |
sufficient. Affirmed. Will |
son, J.
Buck Haney VS.. the State; appeal from
Rusk. Where there is no bill OF excep- |
tions taken to the action Of the court in
overruling motion for continuance, ep-
peilant cannot be heard to complaiu,
IS this court will not revise |
the ruling without such exception. There
Is no material error disclosed By any DILL
of exception. Affirmed. Wilson, j.
Joe aud Johnson Heard vs. the State;
appeal from Harrison. Motion for re-
hearing. Appellants were convicted on
statements and declarations amounting
to direct confessions of guilt, made on
two separate occasions, when both were
present; counsel for appellants urgently |
insists that the court erred in emitting to |
submit the law of circumstantial evil |
dence. Held: Under the testimony q |
charge on circumstantial evidence was
not necessary Motion for rehearing
overruled. Wilson, J.